Tensions erupt between telcos, cablecos over over California broadband build out subsidy levels

As recently reported on this blog, California's incumbent telcos are bitching to the California Public Utilities Commission, complaining a 40 percent subsidy to underwrite the cost of building out broadband infrastructure to areas of the state lacking adequate access under the CPUC's California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) isn't likely to be enough for many potential projects.

Now the griping has turned into a contretemps between some of the biggest players and Comcast has jumped into the fray. In comments filed Nov. 19 on the eve of a CPUC hearing today to consider restructuring the CASF, Verizon criticizes AT&T's suggestion the 60 percent provider match be abandoned, warning it could lead to too much state funding of some projects.

In its Nov. 19 comments filed with the CPUC, cable provider Comcast takes issue with AT&T's "incredible" suggestion that the CASF fully subsidize some projects and Verizon's proposal that the CASF share be increased up to 80 percent for selected projects. The cable company warns the higher CASF funding threshold would be contrary to the CASF's goal of funding only projects that are economically viable.

AT&T's suggestion that CASF provide 100 percent funding for selected high cost projects in unserved areas "is truly outrageous, particularly coming from AT&T," Comcast said in its filed comments. "The CASF was not set up to be a slush fund to cover 100 percent of the costs of the largest ILEC in the state."

Telco market segmentation has shrunk U.S. residential wireline service area map, setting stage for locals to take over last mile

The widespread prevalence of broadband black holes throughout the United States — which can be found in urban, suburban, semi-rural and rural areas — has brought to light a major change in the landscape of residential telecommunications service. In modern times, residential telecommunications has meant near universal service to all but the most remote areas.

With the advent of high speed Internet, the residential wireline market is no longer a single one but has been segmented by the telcos who maintain monopolistic control over their markets. Over the past 2-3 years, the boundaries of broadband black holes have hardened and delineate the two segments.

The more accurate description is the residential market hasn’t been so much segmented but rather shrunk. One only need compare the telcos’ maps of where they provide Plain Old Telephone Service (POTS) and areas where advanced Internet protocol-based services are offered to graphically see the shrinkage.

This is a permanent alteration of America’s telecommunications map. Despite telcos’ promises to “turn up” advanced services to these areas over the past decade, it’s now apparent that these statements are a time buying PR ploy to keep regulators and politicians at bay. Now the residential wireline telecommunications map is posed to shrink even further with the limited rollout of fiber to the home service by Verizon and AT&T’s technologically constrained deployment of its fiber to the node Project Lightspeed as both companies migrate from DSL.

This redrawing of America’s telecommunications map has major implications for so-called “last mile” residential wireline. Where they don’t provide last mile IP-based access, the telcos will instead serve as first and middle mile telecom providers. Small local telcos and the residents themselves will become the default last mile providers. Where it makes business sense, smaller telcos that specialize in serving communities will deploy fiber to the node and fiber to the home. Where the numbers don’t pencil out for the small telcos, the residents will deploy their own fiber and fund it though voluntary cooperatives and special taxing districts.

Over the next several years, fiber will come to be viewed as a utility not unlike electric power and water and will appear on residential MLS real estate listings. Properties that lack fiber optic access will be at a distinct disadvantage to those that have fiber, creating a strong incentive for property owners to work together to bring fiber to their neighborhoods to better capitalize on recovering real estate values following the current market downturn.

Limited DSL range disappoints in Western Massachusetts, divides towns into digital haves and have nots

As reported earlier this year, Verizon is rolling out DSL in 24 Western Massachusetts towns. But state Rep. Denis Guyer, D-Dalton, is hearing from irate constituents who understandably believed that if their town is getting the service, that's just what it means and are flummoxed that they're still stuck with dialup or forced to suck a satellite.

The problem is Verizon is using underpowered DSL technology -- which should be dubbed "Doesn't Serve Lots"-- that can only serve parts of the towns. This puts pols like Guyer who are pushing to bring their districts into the modern age of telecommunications in a tough spot since voting districts don't necessarily coincide with DSL availability limits. For those covered by Verizon's DSL deployment, pols like Guyer look like a hero. But from the perspective of his constituents outside Verizon's DSL service limit, he looks like a ineffective bum. As this blog notes, like politics all broadband is local.

The item published in the North Adams Transcript is aptly headlined Guyer says Verizon's Broadband not so broad. So true for not only Western Massachusetts but sadly anywhere in the U.S. served by feeble telco DSL.

Misgivings in Maryland over Verizon FiOS reach

Charles County, Maryland commissioners are concerned a franchise deal the county is finalizing with Verizon to install Verizon's proprietary FiOS fiber optic cable in county rights of way won't serve the county's telecommunications needs.

SouthMdNews.com reports:

‘‘I want to know how we’re improving what we [have] now,” said commissioners’ President F. Wayne Cooper (D). He compared the pending Verizon deal to that of a builder making big promises in order to secure approval for a small project.

‘‘This sounds an awful lot like ‘let me build the retail now, and I’ll build the offices later.’”

Again, staff was reluctant to discuss the details of the Verizon agreement on the record. However, Rick Elrod, the county’s consultant for the Verizon deal, admitted that the Verizon project being discussed would not be as broad as the commissioners would like.

Sounds like the commissioners need to consider alternatives such as open access fiber lest they end up with angry constituents due to the limitations of the proposed Verizon FiOS project.

Telecompetitor: Telcos should offer complementary wireline and wireless broadband to residential customers

Telecompetitor is out with analysis today that warns wireless services that have been cannibalizing first tier telcos' landline voice subscriber base also pose a threat to their wireline broadband services.

Telcos can ameliorate the threat, telecompetitor suggests, by segmenting their residential broadband offerings into two complementary products: A wireline-based broadband "heavy" connection featuring fast throughput and a broadband "lite" wireless service delivered via their 3G and, later, 4G, cellular system-based service.

Service that will seamlessly extend the broadband experience, both inside and outside of the home, is "quite compelling," telecompetitor concludes, pointing to a Nielsen Mobile study released Tuesday that found wireless broadband access cards while originally targeted at mobile users are increasingly popular among fixed residential users.

Although it makes sense on its face, this strategy is currently flawed insofar that it assumes telcos are already providing robust wireline broadband connections to residential customers who can get them. That's hardly the case for most residential customers whose DSL connections typically max out at 3 Mbs and often at slower speeds very close to current 3G cellular wireless broadband throughputs. (I omit AT&T's U-Verse and Verizon's FiOS services since they're available to only a small fraction of their residential customer bases.)

The rise in fixed residential use of 3G cellular broadband connections discovered by Nielsen Mobile is likely being driven by the lack of wireline-based broadband offerings. As this blog reported a few months back, some telcos such as Verizon Wireless have picked off AT&T residential customers in the many areas where AT&T has neither wireline nor terrestrial wireless-based broadband offerings. That strategy also gives Verizon the opportunity to cross sell its cellular voice plans to AT&T customers and build brand loyalty.

Self perpetuating broadband black holes a product of telcos' cynical digital redlining strategy

Since late 2006 and again this week, there have been reports of slowing growth in U.S. wireline broadband subscribers and particularly those using telco-provided Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) service. Analysts and other observers have blamed the demand side of the market, attributing the decline to a slowing economy and market saturation.

There's likely a better explanation -- and it's on the supply side of the equation. Since 2006, DSL deployments by the tier 1 telcos such as AT&T and Verizon have been slowing and are now all but halted as the companies concentrate on building out their triple play (U-Verse and FiOS, respectively) infrastructures in a relative few selected markets.

For those unfortunate enough to reside or do business in these companies' service territories where they don't offer wireline broadband connections, there's another factor at work: the self perpetuating broadband black hole. They're the natural product of the telcos' digital redlining strategy.

Since the big telcos don't do market research, they rely on what they term as "pent up demand" for services. As the broadband boom unfolded at the start of the decade, pent up demand grew. Right around the time of the first reports of a broadband "slowdown" began appearing, that pent up demand had likely recently peaked. Folks who have been asking for wireline broadband connections over a period of 5-7 years and have yet to obtain them by mid-2008 have likely concluded they never will. So they stop asking for service, ignore misguided ads for telco broadband, and pent up demand for broadband falls away. The telcos can then cynically point to the falling demand to justify their continued failure to deploy broadband infrastructure to these redlined neighborhoods.

Unusual competitive situation develops in the Big D: Verizon plans FiOS overbuild in areas served by AT&T U-Verse

Matt Stump at Onetrak reports Verizon is opting to go head to head with AT&T in the IPTV triple play market for about 60,000 customers in suburban Dallas.

The development is being seen by some such as Telecompetitor as possibly the opening salvo of a competitive war between the two big telco TV players in states such as Texas where the telcos have successfully lobbied for state video franchises. It's also likely a contest of IPTV technology with Verizon betting when it comes to delivering HDTV, it can clean AT&T's clock with its fiber to the home (FTTN) full fiber infrastructure compared to AT&T's hybrid fiber and copper cable VDSL-based plant delivering Ma Bell's U-Verse Internet/TV/phone bundle.

What's also interesting about this overbuild is there's also a cable provider in this same Dallas area, Time Warner Cable, that will now find itself competing not just with a single telco in the usual duopolistic market configuration, but with two.

Onetrak concludes Verizon's move could have significant implications for other states such as Florida, California, Indiana, Washington and Oregon where Verizon operates inside AT&T and Qwest territory.

Editor: Incomplete, inadequate telecom infrastructure requires state government to step into the gap

Broadband is essential as roads and like roads, it can't be left to the private sector alone, writes Charlotte Observer Associate Editor Mary C. Schulken.

Schulken cites a 2007 report by the North Carolina s e-NC Authority showing in four counties -- Jones, Greene, Warren and Gates -- less than 50 percent of the households can obtain access to high speed Internet services, while in 21 more than 30 percent are mired in broadband black holes.

"Access to high-speed Internet is as basic today as being connected by a good road -- and offers the same public benefit," Schulken writes. "Yet the private sector will not pay to put it within reach of every household and every community in North Carolina. The state needs to step up and invest in connecting the last mile."

Too bad this is AT&T territory. Up north in Massachusetts, a Verizon spokesman says the company is deploying its FiOS fiber optic plant without regard to population density and particular in areas where the old cable plant needs replacement.

Population density not determining factor in Verizon fiber deployment, spokesman says

More so than population density, the condition of the existing copper cable plant influences where Verizon plans to deploy its FiOS fiber optic infrastructure, a Verizon spokesman told the Worcester (Mass.) Business Journal.

"If you have to replace the copper in a particular area, there's no sense putting more copper in there," the spokesman told the newspaper.

Another factor driving fiber is the need to offer bundled services to attract residential customers who have abandoned POTS (Plain Old Telephone Service) over copper in favor of wireless phone service.

Verizon introduces 3Mbs DSL in Western Masschusetts digital ghetto

Western Massachusetts, which the Boston Globe last July described as a "new kind of ghetto" confined to dial up and satellite Internet access, is finally entering the modern age of telecommunications.

Nearly two dozen communities are set to get by summer what's increasingly being viewed as basic broadband service: 3Mbs downloads delivered by Verizon DSL, the telco announced May 1.

Verizon said the DSL deployment would reach two-thirds of the 31 western Massachusetts communities identified by the state as having no broadband services. (What about the other one third, the residents of those areas must surely be asking) Verizon added the rollout is in line with Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick's initiative to bring more broadband to unserved and underserved communities in Massachusetts.

"The governor and western Massachusetts legislative delegation have put the proper focus on the real need for broadband expansion in the region, and we want to do everything we can to address that need," said Donna Cupelo, Verizon region president for Massachusetts and Rhode Island. We look forward to working with our government leaders to explore ways to bring broadband to other areas that are in need in Massachusetts."

This blogger will be watching closely to see if the Verizon's bigger counterpart, AT&T, will make similar efforts to shrink its own sprawling broadband back holes in its 22 state service area.

Verizon Wireless picks off more AT&T residential customers in Northern California

There are more indications Verizon Wireless is moving into AT&T's service area with its 3G wireless broadband service offering, snapping up fixed location broadband subscribers that AT&T has neglected to serve with wireline-based broadband Internet access.

The North Bay Business Journal reports Verizon has expanded its wireless broadband service area up the Highway 101 corridor from Santa Rosa to Cloverdale, and out to coastal Sea Ranch. That's in addition to Clearlake, Lakeport and Middletown in Lake County, and Ukiah, Willits, Laytonville, Fort Bragg and Hopland in Mendocino County, encompassing large areas long lacking high speed Internet access.

While Verizon Wireless is primarily targeting mobile customers, it's finding a market in fixed AT&T residential and small business customers who have suffered years of digital deprivation in AT&T's sprawling broadband black holes.

Verizon offers speeds of 600 Kbs to 1.4 Mbs for downloads 500 to 800 Kbs on the uplink. That's arguably not broadband class throughput even at the high end of the range (most connections are likely to come in at half the advertised maximums), but a considerably better option than AT&T's ancient dialup or sluggish, costly satellite Internet.

From a competitive standpoint, this is bad news for AT&T. By offering a quasi-broadband service for residential subscribers situated in the many broadband black holes in AT&T's wire line service area, Verizon is likely to also build brand name loyalty and steal away wireless voice subscribers who might otherwise sign up with AT&T.

Telco regulators should prohibit passive "soft" divestiture and require companies to upgrade or sell off assets

The two major telcos in the United States, AT&T and Verizon, have segmented their residential wire line markets into three groups.

The first segment is where the telcos are deploying their state-of-the-art infrastructure. For AT&T, it’s the company’s hybrid fiber-copper based VDSL “Project Lightspeed” rollout in support of its Internet/Video/Voice “triple play” U-Verse product bundle. For Verizon, it’s the telco’s FiOS fiber to the premises infrastructure that like U-Verse offers the triple play bundle but with far greater bandwidth and expansion capacity. This “prime” segment comprises only a small percentage of each company’s total residential lines.

The second residential wire line segment features “double play” offerings of broadband Internet and traditional analog POTS (plain old telephone service) delivered over copper cable infrastructure. Broadband is provided by legacy ADSL central office DSLAMs and remote terminals. This “preferred” segment comprises the bulk of the two telcos’ residential customer base.

Which brings us to the third and last market segment. Call it the “non preferred” orphan segment. It is in the words of one independent ISP being kept on life support, serviced only when necessary by makeshift “bubble gum and bailing wire” repairs. Traditional voice service can be spotty, particularly when it rains and afterwards when the sun expands and dries aging aerial cables. Broadband Internet access is nonexistent and residential customers are stuck using early 1990s era dial up technology. In many cases, DSL remote terminals have been installed but were never activated and are now considered obsolete, destined never to be “turned up” in telco parlance. While comprising about 20 percent of the telcos’ residential subscriber base, this third segment accounts for the bulk of repair costs and generates the most complaints to regulators.

This segment has been divested by the telcos, either actively or passively. An example of active divestiture is Verizon’s sale of large portions of its residential territory in several New England states including Maine and Vermont. AT&T, by contrast, has chosen the route of passive or "soft" divestiture. AT&T doesn’t want to service its tertiary residential market segment or upgrade the infrastructure within it in order to offer more services, but the company hasn’t made any efforts to spin off portions of it either. Consequently, the millions of unfortunate residents of this market segment are stuck in telecommunications limbo land where time stands still and the calendar still reads 1991.

Since these companies typically hold monopolistic positions in their third and least desired segments, regulators should prohibit the neglectful passive divestiture practiced most prominently by AT&T and give the telcos a choice: bring your services up to modern standards or sell and get out and make way for other providers who can offer better services.

Qwest bullish on residential broadband, plans $1.8B FTTN deployment

Dow Jones reports today that Denver-based telco Qwest Communications International plans to spend $1.8 billion to build fiber to the node (FTTN) infrastructure serving 1.5 million homes in its top 23 markets.

Qwest joins AT&T in adopting the lower cost FTTN fiber/copper hybrid architecture, which AT&T is deploying as Project Lightspeed in selected areas to support its triple play IPTV video/Internet/voice bundle marketed under the brand name U-Verse.

By contrast, the nation's second largest telco, Verizon, has opted for a costlier Fiber To the Home (FTTN) architecture that offers residential customers higher throughput speeds, greater potential for expanded service offerings, and reduced risk of technological obsolescence.

Qwest estimates the FTTN deployment will run about $175 per home -- far less than FTTH. Qwest says about 60 percent of its upgraded homes will have speeds up to 7 Mbs.

Vermont deal with Fairpoint condemns state to "a dead-end future," union official says

Vermont regulators have given the go ahead to North Carolina-based Fairpoint Communications to purchase Verizon's telephone system in the state for $2.7 billion.

The Charlotte Observer reports the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 2326, which represents about 500 Verizon employees, is unhappy with the deal. The local's business manager, Mike Spillane, says it condemns Vermonters to "a dead-end future that impacts the economy and jobs."

"We're going to be stuck with a DSL copper-based product that's the horse and buggy of broadband," Spillane told the newspaper.

Under the terms of the approval, that horse and buggy run will only cover half the state by 2010, meaning those not on the route will have to dial up or suck a satellite for the foreseeable.

Author of California legislation benefitting telcos solicited charitable contributions from Verizon

The Sacramento Bee is reporting California Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez solicited $120,000 in contributions to his designated charities from Verizon three months after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Núñez's Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act of 2006 into law.

In addition, the newspaper reports AT&T made three grants of $5,000 apiece last year at Núñez's behest.

The law permits telcos like Verizon and AT&T to offer advanced broadband-based telecommunications services including Internet Protocol TV (IPTV) with a statewide franchise granted by the California Public Utilities Commission. The legislation authored by Núñez, AB 2987, shafted areas outside of urban centers such as Núñez's Los Angeles district because it does not require providers to build out their infrastructures, sanctioning digital redlining and leaving gaping broadband black holes in these areas intact.

A spokesman for Núñez issued the perfunctory denial of any link between the solicitation of Verizon and the legislation.

Why Verizon opted for fiber over DSL

Verizon’s Chief Technology Officer, Mark Wegleitner, explains in an interview with CNET News.com:

“I wouldn’t say that AT&T has gotten it wrong. DSL is a good technology,” he noted. “Our concern was more about what happens a few years out. And that’s why we picked fiber … I can’t really predict how other technologies will grow, but we know that fiber gave us the headroom we needed.”

Verizon sends mixed messages on need for Mass. state franchise legislation

Last month, I noted local government franchising doesn't seem to be slowing down telcos like Verizon who have backed legislation in various states that would put the state instead of local governments in charge of issuing franchises. I pointed to Verizon's progress in New York and also questioned why given the slow pace of telco broadband infrastructure deployment there would be any need to bypass the locals in the first place.

The telcos complain it takes too long to deploy new broadband infrastructure to support IPTV (Internet Protocol Over TV) when they have to negotiate agreements with local governments one jurisdiction at a time.

This week, The Boston Globe reports Verizon officials concede that local governments in Massachusetts are not slowing Verizon's rollout of its fiber to the home FiOS infrastructure, undercutting Verizon's claim state franchise legislation is needed in that state.

It's only natural: U.S. Supreme Court rejects anti-trust action targeting big telcos

Bloomberg reports the U.S. Supreme Court today tossed out a lawsuit alleging telcos Verizon, AT&T Inc. and Qwest violated anti-trust law by colluding not to compete in each other's service areas.

The high court found there was no evidence of collusion. Rather, the justices ruled 7-2, the fact that the former baby bells hardly ever directly compete is a natural consequence of their business models. "There is no reason to infer that the companies had agreed among themselves to do what was only natural anyway," Justice David Souter wrote for the court.

Content providers could make a big play for the pipes

When television was a relatively new technology, mass communications theorist Marshall McLuhan predicted it would produce an electronic global village linked together by a medium so powerful that the medium itself would be as important as its content. Thus, McLuhan famously pronounced in his 1964 book Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, “the medium is the message.”

If McLuhan were alive today, he’d surely say the same about Internet and with great emphasis. It’s become such a powerful global medium that it’s threatening to reshape TV itself along with other traditional media outlets such as radio and print publications. Because the Internet can transport all forms of communication and do so interactively, it’s arguably McLuhan’s uber medium. It’s no wonder that newspapers, television and radio are paying homage to the Internet, scrambling to get their content on it.

Given the power of this emerging medium, expect to see content providers to take a greater stake in owning Internet infrastructure directly as cable provider Comcast already does. Last year, News Corp. owner Rupert Murdoch complained about the current patchwork state of Internet access, with large numbers of people unable to obtain broadband connections to the Internet. Murdoch and other media titans could end up making plays for telcos and cable companies to speed broadband deployment in order to reach larger audiences for their content.

If they were joined by big Internet content amalgamators Yahoo! and Google, their economic power would be enormous, able to finance a crash program to upgrade the nation’s infrastructure to support near universal broadband access. It’s also quite conceivable that the debate over network neutrality in which the cable and telcos claim they should be able to charge media content providers for access to their systems (net neutrality advocates say they shouldn’t) could provoke media content providers to launch hostile takeovers of big telcos and cable companies. You want to charge us to use your pipes? Forget about it; we want those pipes!

Telcos like Verizon that are putting in fiber optic based systems that offer adequate bandwidth to easily carry all types of Internet content now and in the near future will likely be the most attractive takeover targets. By contrast, AT&T’s strategy utilizing both fiber and its legacy copper cable plant could make it a less attractive target for a media company. But Ma Bell would certainly have to be on the list by virtue of her sheer size and ownership of vast swaths of the nation’s Internet infrastructure.